tv Charlie Rose PBS September 19, 2011 11:00pm-12:00am PDT
>> charlie: welcome to our program. tonight we take a look at palestinian statehoowhich is a big ise at the unite nations beginning with william hague, thbritish foreign secretary. >> i strongly believe in a palestinian sta alongside a secure israel. the only way to bring that about is by agreement between both sides. and so my advice to the esident, i'll be talking to him again tomorrow while here in new york going to the security council and having a vote doesn't provide the answer. that's not a course that we have recommended because it brings as you said in the introduction the veto of the united states and nobody is any fward. it's getting back to the negotiations. >> charlie: prince turki member of the royal family and former head of the intelligence ambassador to the united kingdom and the united states. >> i think it is a deserved
it will be vetoed by the united states. also on the agenda will be the arab spring, iran'nuclear program and the famine in africa. we begin our program th the british foreign secretary, william hague, a close ally of the prime minister and a key memberment i'm proud to have the foreign secretary at this table for the first time. welcome. >> thank you very much. it's good to be here. >> charlie: it's fair to ay the question of the state hood by the palestinians is that most intensely debated subject of this united nations general assembly. where do you think it is? >> well, it is as is well-known as president abbas has said he will submit an application of full membership and to go to the security council. this is somebody set out in his speech at the end of this week. what is happening is of course we're all talking bit, we're all negotiating about it, we're all putting pressure behind the scenes, in our case in the cas of european countries such as britain trying to push thize ray lisa and the palestinians back
into negotiations. and i strongly believe in a palestinian state alongside a security israel. the only way to bring th about is by agreemen between both sides. my advice to president abbas, going tohe secuty council to provide a vote doesn't provide the answer. that's not a course we have recommended because it bris you said in your introduction a veto from the unit states and nobody is any further fward. it is getting back to negotiations. what we're trying to do is actually to push it in more desirable direction, which is to get them back into negotiations. >> charlie: why should the palestinians believe there is any realistic expectation of progress and negotiations when hasn't happened so far? >> well, that is a goo question. and that means that any statements that brought them back to negotiations by whatever
form would have to give palestinians some asrance that a real effort was going to be made in the near future. they worry that a two-state solution is slipping away. israeli settlement expansion reinforces that concern and their right to be worried but it's slipping away. they do need to see some urgency indemnity. i hope that is what can be achieved and i think it's important toay that to people in the united states, a long term security of israel may diminish the way the worl is going. if a two-state solution cannot be arrived at soon, then it may become impossible to arrive at that and that is not good for the long term security of israel. >> charlie: so what do you think or expect the israes may be prepared to do to seek a palestinian decision not to go ahead and to enter io direct negotiations? >> well, they have said they're in position over the past year.
president netanyahu was here in the united states and spoke about it. in one sense things have moved on and the united states has said that a settlemen should be based on 1967 borders. and israel wants to move closer to that. so they have their own politicals difficulties, their internal difficulties over that. that is an important advance because that is important for the palestinians. theye not been able to do and what we think they should have done is stop the expansion of settlements. earlier this year, we voted for the palestinian resolution on settlements at the security council. those are in our view illeg. they are on occupied land, they damage the prospects of achieving a two-state solution. so on that, we have differed from the united states. we voted the opposite way to the united states in the secure council. it's quite a rare thing for the united kingdom but we did that on the settlement issue. on that, i think israel has not been preparedo give enough ground as it were to giver, to
make a generous enough offer to the palestinians so far. >> charlie: the palestinians also aue that they haveeen doing some governing in ramala. and that there has been no response from the israelis fully in response to that a thefore that's another reason they feel like they have to seek state hood of the u.n. >> well it is true, they are frustrated, yes, absolutely. and they have done well i think on the west bank, not in gaza of course but on the west bank in statement building, building institutions of the state. our president abbas and his prime minister has done a good job of that. and so we do want to acknowledge the progress that they are king but we also have to recognize the security concerns of israel. and on thatbasis, encourage them together again. but i do stress that again.
the way forward is to reenter negotiations. whatever happens in terms of u.n. votes, whatever happened in the general assembly or the security camp, we're only actually getting anywhere if the even product is israelisnd palestinia will go back into negotiations togher. >> charlie: how can israeli security concerns be guaranteed? >> well, they are for the long term by agreeing to a two-state solution. that does require israel to believe the sincety. andpaw gazf course is the classic example. i believe in the palestinian leadership and the desire of the paleinian people to have peace. at some point if there's going to be a peaceful future for both israelis and palestinians, they do have to make the generous
offer towards each other. and so although this is very difficult and it has absorbed the time and created immense frustration for presidents now it is the united stat driving them to the negotiations and the foreign countries from the ue to use leverage as we're doing in this case. we're withholding from either side in this 27 votes in the general assembly or four votes in the security council, in orr to try to push them towards negotiating together again. >> charlie: i'm looking for it because you're a diplomate. the language that might bring them to engage in battle negotiates that we haven't seen yet. >> we will not be able to draft not even at your distinguhed table here. there are people -- >> charlie: you can help us derstand what it might be.
>> well look, wenow -- >> crlie: you don'tave to draft it, st suggest it. >> we know what the issues are. is it the 1679order is israel to be described as a jewish state, what is to happen to settlement activity. >> charlie: what happens to jerusalem. >> well, where i stand on that is that jerusalem in a two-state solution, jerusalem should be the shared capitol of both states. we believe in a two-state solution base on 1967 borders. we've agreed swaps of land with a just settlement for refugees. that's a difficult thing to decide. >> charlie: and a right of return. >> it's defining and settling what the right of return is. and with jerusal as the shared capitol of both states. now that is our position. it's a unified european posion as well, as well as the british position. and clearly those things can only be brought about by the
process of going. we must remember that in talk of votes. >> charlie: ut als you know the israelis have said unax ceptable, 67 borders is unaccept been, shared jerusalem a capitol is unacceptable. the prime minister hassaid that. >> if they want and i believe they do want long term securities for their count, then they will have to many brace those things, arrive at a settlement around those parameters. and i thinkt's vital for israel to do so. the arab spring brings many benefits. it's a hugely positive thing for the world on the whole but i don't think israel would want and the democratic politics of egypt in the years to come a bidding war among different parties about who can become more hostile to israel because the palestinianssue is not being settled. that is a danger for israel. also they affect iran, their nuclear program is a major
threat to peace in theegion and the world, and to focus on facing up to that threat also requiresaking the agreement with the palestinians. it is vital for israel's security that they do so. >> charlie: do you think the israelis feel today under siege, and demonized around the world. >> your question was, do they feel like they are under siege. and i think if they're not careful, they will end up more under siege than they feel today. and that's why it's so important for them to try to act decisively and with the necessary generosity, reciprocated on the palestinian side torrive at a two-state settlement on the paltinian side. >> charlie: we have the attack on cairo. >> yes. >> charlie: you know the turkish government had to demand an apology which did not happen.
>> yes. >> charlie: there are other problems that they had before the arab spring, good relationships which no longer exist. >> yes. and firmly thosehing have moved against israelis in recent months. but it would be the wrong reaction to that to circle the wago and say we're going tick on the rest of the world, israel needs friends and allies. and look staing friends such as the united kingdom and such as the ministers who make it the british government now who do t compromise on the security or legitimacy of israel, urging them to make the necessary steps towards resumption of negotiations. >> charlie: what do you think is going to happen to each. obviously there's been additional protests in the square. the army has not eliminated emergency rule. they have not yet had an election. >> yes. >> charlie: there's real concern about the future. >> yes.
there is some concern. i don't think we should become famili with all of those things as you say they've not yet had an electi. actually i was one of the people who wanted not to have it too quickly. >> charlie: because it was more organized than everody else or for some other reason. >> that's one way of putting it. because new political parties have not had the chance to develop. i think they are sll struggling to develop on a coherent national basis. now we must be careful not to lecture the egyptians how to conduct their affairs. it is their revolution, it is their country and they are not going to adopt an exact replica of capitol hill or the parliament and say we're having a democracy just like western countries. but we do want them to be able to have an economy that's more open to europe and vice versa. we do want them to develop the attributes of a democrat tote and we should be ready. we have to find a way of helping
them without preaching to them and that's part of what's going on in new york this week. we will have the g8, the partnership meeting of foreign ministers with the arab prime ministers working out how we do that. didot answer your question wh's going to happen but i think trying to predict for arab countries what is going to happen is very very hazardous person. >> charlie: you answered what your concerns are. let me move to libya where your government and t french government play a primary role as d the united states but t united states pulled back a little andfrance and britain ok the lead. how is that going in terms of e next government. >> it's going well. we mus be be complacen about this and clearly yet there are different forces. there are as in any country and there are different people who want to be in the government and
as we speak, the national trsition council have not been able to conclude their negotiations who is going to be in the next council and who is going to occupy all the ministries. but the bright side far outways that. i was in tripoli and benghazi a few weeks ago. and they want to be like baghdad, to say it's nothing like that at all much the rubbish is going collected, there's no wide spread looting, children are going back to back to school, shops are opening. they've done a good job presiding over that so far. they should have the bern -- benefit of it all. >> charlie: it could end u like tehran becaus of islamic forces tt might gain control. >> yes, people do say that too.
all i can say in answer to that we've got to know the leaders at least quite well over the last six nths. chairman jabril. charlie: the military leaders. >> some of our military and our officials are acquainted with them but i also had meetings with the whole transitional council on two occasions. and i do believe that they really believe in a free and democratic libya. and they express it as they want to be a moderate muslim country that's how they put it. and he's genuinely respected figure. now i can't guarantee they will be able to hold on to it and we can't tell them how to run their affairs. they have a good chance to ld on to that and the way we engage them open up again the european economy to them try to include them more in the family around
the mediterranean what is whatever possible without qaddafi the better their chances will be. >> charlie: do you think we will discover things between the relationship between qaddafi and your government and the american government that would be embarrassing to all. >> well, some thing have already en discovered or alled that may be embarrassing. anwhat i would say about that that i think the basic strategy of engaging with the qaddi regime to induce them, to get rid of some of theirost sinister weapons programs as well as to agree to the extradition of people accused of the locker be bombing and so on, that was the right thing to do. to imagine how much more difficult this last six months if qaddafi had continued to develop weapons of mass destruction. that was t right thing to do. now with the benefit of hindsight anthe benefit of being in the opposition at the time, it is possible to say that
perhaps the relationship became too chummy in me respects. >> charlie: -- intelligence sources especially. >> well, it was one allegation we're acquiring into that. it was contact on intelligence channels that started the process of persuading qaddafi to move away from those weapons programs. so we shouldn't say that all of that was wrong. that was an integral part of the successful strategy on libya. but when it comes to the relief by the scottish ministers of the convicted lockerbe, i believe that was absolutely wrong. the fact he's still alive today even though he was released on compsionate ground because he was thought to beear death just amplifies that. so the prime minister and i, when we were in opposition,
completelyisagreed with that. some decisions were wrong. the overall approach i think was correct. >> charlie: syria? >> syria is not the same as libya. it's not the same international coalition. we are not contemplating military intervention in syria in the way we did libya. the arab league is a different position. russia has a different position. but i think even their allies like russia are very concerned about what's happening there. >> even iran seems to be concerned. >> even iran hedges its bets about this. my own view is i spent a lot time at a fork in the road or a long time to go down the other fork. and he passed that fork. he has killed too many of the people ofis own country to restor his legitimacy in the
eyes of his own people and of theorld. so i fully agree with what president obama said in august, they should go. >> charlie: is there military judgment how long he can survive? >> i think that's very difficult because that relies on, would rely on knowing how quickly opposition may spread and judging the loyalty of his own arm forces. there are some reports of them not being loyal. >> charlie: and being shot because they weren't. >> yes. you can't judge from outside at what point that cracks but i think you can judge from outside when the government has passed the point of no return. that is the view not just of europe pans -- europeans and americans but the view of many leaders as well. >> charlie: will there be an arab spring even though it's not an arab country.
>> it must not be confused with arab societies. but it shows -- >> charlie: the values are univerl, ty are not unique to arab. >> no. you anticipate my next point. ose values are universal and wetrongly believe human rights are universal and i gave a spee in london i think very very critical of iran for its appalling human rights record with the tension of opposition leads. there are more journalists now in prison in iran than any other country in the world. this is a very very depressing theme. and i think that we'll find in the long term, that does not work. that actually the pressure builds up among their own population. it's hard to say however how long that term is. >> charlie: we talk many states in the region of which perhaps the most important is turkey. >> yes. and turkey is a great partner. the for mister is one of the greatest more than ministers in
the world i spend most time on the telephone with. >> charlie: why is that because turkey's important or you are soul mates. >> it's for several reasons. they have a more active foreign policy than a few years ago and has a growing economy to match it. turkey is a european country ad has the fastest growing economy in eure. so it is becoming a much bigger weight in the world. it is expanding diplomatically in many new embassies in the world. >> charlie: the develop is beeen turkey and iran. >> if that is the case, and i think that will be over simplifying it and egyptians would certainly object to that, let us say. but nevertheless, that general trend is one we should welcome because i think turkey embraces many of the same values a
turkey is an important nato ally. they just worked with us very well on lib, for stance. for all of these reasons, and it's because soany of the problems we're dealing with can be seen from our conversation is in the vicinity of turkey. >> charlie: because the prime minister went to cairo and talked about a secular government to the dismay of your muslim brother hood. >> yes. >> charlie: offering a secular model for those error you been countries. >> that's a good thing too because remember these arab countries do not have a model to follow. they have people that when the berlin wall came down and communism collapsed in eastern europe, they wanted to be like western europe and they knew what model really they wanted to follow and they wanted to come into the european union. the arab countries don't have that model to follow of arab democracy. but in turkey, it was a
successful muslim democracy as there is in indonesia. so there are non-arab models for them to follow and i think it's very good the turks are putting themselves forward in that way. >> charlie: any concerns about the islamist influence in turkey and what their intention is over the ng run? >> well, no, not -- >> charlie: the army no longer plays the same role it did as you know. >> that's right. it's part of the a stable demoatic society and the army doesn't play that role. so i thi we shouldee that as a growing maturity of turkey raer tn belarmed byt. and i find that foreign policy influence is extremely positive. this a very strong part of the uk. we are strong advocates of them entering the european union. that of course is a controversial subject in europe. >> charlie: why is that? what is the word about. >> it's out of 27 countries,
europe of course is struggling with se serious difficulties over the euro zone. >> charlie: and their own muslim population. >> turkey is different from other european countries. now we would argue that is a very good thing, that turkey is a crucial bridge between europe and the middle east, and that europe should be, that it would be a strategic, it would be extremely shoright strategic disaster for europ to turn away that large muslim population. other people would argue of course this is too much for europe to digest, the cultures are very different but i think that's fundamentally the ong approach. >> charlie: do you wo tha our politics or dysfunction and not dealing with the issues that are necessary for the united states to maintain its geo political leadership? >> well, i have to be a diplomate. i have to be dramatic about thi of course and i'm always an optimist about the united
stes. i have enormous respect. charlie: you vacati here by the way. >> being in america, particularly in montana. that is rig. so i have, i believe, incredible sense of enterprise inthe united states, it's something that will last for decades to come. >> charlie: all this about american decline is what? >> well, i think it is overstated. there is no, if you look at the growth of the economies of china and brazil and other parts of soheast asia and latin erica, of course it i true that american output will be a smaller share of the world economy. and i think actually the approach that the american administration has taken to libya that we just discussed where they say we'll memorize it, we will be there to help in crucial ways but you are in the lead in france and britain and the arab countries in doing
this. i think that is n bad thing and reminding others of their own responsibilities in the world. so i think we do have to adjust to that. bu i think the capacity of america to generate wealth, the pacity and will of america to sport human rights a freedom and prosperity in the wor, and to be there decisive moments as america has been and all the decisive moments of the last centy. i have great confidence that that willontinue. >> charlie: mr. foreign secretary, thank you so much. i hope we n do this again. >> i will be a pleasure. thank you. >> charlie: turki al faisal is here former direct of saudi arabia intelligence, former sawed ambassador to the united kipg dumb and the united states. his country has been key in the peace negotiations in the middle east. last sunday prin turki wrote in the new york time the united
states must support the palestinian at the united nations next month or losing the little credibility it has i the arab world. i am pleased to have turki al faisal back at this table to talk abouthe middle east at a crucial time in the united nations and in the regions. welcome. >> thank you for hosting me again. >> charlie: where do you think the statehood movement is today? >> let me start by saying that this issue of statehood is full of ironies. the important ones of which are that the united states was the country that pushed for israel's recognition as a state at the united nationsack in 1947 and 48. >> charlie: right. >> israel was created as a state by the united nions in 1947-48. >> charlie: with thsupport of the united states. >> and other countries as well. so it is really ironic that whn it comes to having the partner in peace as it were for israel
over the israeli palestinian, seeking statehood from theame organization that established israel in 1948, the u.s. opposes it and israel opposes it. there was tod an article about public opinions survey in the west bank where showed that more than 85% of the population in those territories support president abbas call for statehood for palestinian at the unit nations. you can't get more support than that for an issue among the people. it is a deserved issue that palestinians should get their state. negotiations can go on with palestinian state as they have been going on with the plo since 1993. so i don't see the trouble of establishing a state and continuing the negotiations.
>> charlie: the palestinians want a vote in the security council at this time? >> it's a matter as i said of getting right when decision by an organism, the united nations that established thetate of israel back in 1948. d whether that's going to force the veto or not is know the palestinian decision, it's an american decision. and i think america should reconsider their public stance on that and support the whole statehood for palestine. >> charlie: as you know their conservatives calls to congress in some quarters to withhold support that has already been offered in the pastn terms financial support. and a whole range of arguments that it's better to negotiation there are other states seeking
the kurds would like state hood. isn't it better not to press the issue today. >> no. this has been going on since 1948. the israel negotiations have been going on since 1933. if you remember the courts were supposed to see the establishment of a palestinian state in 1998. five years was the term of the time span of supposedly of the oslo accords. that has not happened so i think it is due time for the palestinians to ve a state. and to compare it to other places, whether it is the current as you say or other places, i think is merely obfuating and trying to divert the palestinians calling for statehood. >> charlie: if there's a united states veto you mentioned in the quote or you wrote in the quote that i read in my
introduction to you, it will be very very damaging for the united states. tell me how you see that play itself out. >> well the united states position in the arab and muslim world is already damaged. if you look at all the public surveys that have taken ple by independent and in some cases by western organizations, they show that american's popularity in the arab and muslim world is at a very low position. >> charlie: but some suggested that with coming of the obama administration, and the wine down of the iraq war that that had changed. >> well it took a spike. it rose for a while. president obama'speech in cairo helped with that. gave people expectations. butdefinitely the let down happened since those issuesere discussed in his speech in cairo, have led to comete disappointment in not on the united states but also with mr. obama. and i think that is something at has to be looked a very
seriouy by united states. united states is a country that is a model for the rest of the word. we in the kingdom of saudi arabia have had very long and strategic relationships with the united states since 1945 when king -- met with president roosevelt. and the people of the kingdom send their children to study in the united states. today we have more than 40,000 saudi students spread throughout the united states acquiring their know how and their skills for their future. so that human contact between us is all important to saud. and my fear is that with this veto that the u.s. will exercise on this issue, that somef these things that we now take for granted will come under great strain. >> chaie: like what? >> well people for example looking to the united states as a source of know how and skills.
up to now at least the saudi students have been seeking to come here to acquire their huh-uh and their skills. i don't know how they would react to america position. there will be those who say becae of amica's excellence in education that people will come to come here. i don't know. but my concern is that those given assumptions that we have about our relationship will come to question. and will become, if you like, a controversial issue for people, not just in my country but even in your country. >> charlie: i hear this idea that in fact the palestinians may not want to vote, they just want to get the process started. and therefore it could be delayed but they want to get it started, and that's what's important to palestinians, as well as their friends. >> could be. and what's wrong with that. >> charlie: they don't want to see the united states have to ve because they know the united states doesn't want to
have to veto. >> if they go to the security council, which they said that they are doing. >> charlie: right. >> that will inevitably bring an american veto. your president has said so, your soas state has said so. >> charlie: can the process be delayedafter the introduction. >> if it's delayed today it's going to happen at another time because as the palestinians have said, they will continue to present their case year after year after year until they get recognition that they ek. >> charlie: here is one argument and i'll read from the "wall street journal" editorial page, which we know has a conservative perspective. it says the following. palestinian president abbas offered a hint of ambition when he wrote in the "new york times" in may quote palestinian admissn to the united nns wod pay its way n only as a political one but also waive the pay for us to pursue claims against israel at the united nations human rights and the
international cell cull court. that mean not the usually reckless solution of the united nations human rights council but the international arrest warrants for -- in other words the "wall street journal" says what palestinians seek isn't the affirmatn of the right to state but rather another tool i their perpetual campaign to harass, legitimize and ultimately destroy israel. >> totally expected from the "wall street journal." and i must say, it's another case of abfusecation. it is i we lisa who refuse to give palestinians state hood. not the other way around.
israelis enjoy all of these things. what is wrong in holding israel accountable as other countries are accountable. whether it is through the international court of justice or the other organs that the world commuty has established for accountability. i see see nothing wrong with that. it is for israel to maintain or to practe good practice if you'd like. instead of going and contra vening the united nations resolution they he been doing since 1967 and doing all the things thedo. look at the wall they're building. already that's an international course of justice decision on that that it is illegal. why shodn't israel be held accountable for that. what legitimizes israel are its actions. the fact it refuses to implement
u.n. resolutions and the other things. >> charlie: what are the arab countries prepare to do? >> they are offering full normalization of relations with israel. this is committed in the arab peace initiative and signed on by all t arab countries of the arab league. but also the countries of the organization of islamic cooperation. more than 56 countrs. >>harlie: that includeshe syrian as well. >> everybody. syrians, iraqis, libyans, etcetera. all of the countries. there is a net gain forrists real. and the only one hat hasn't accepted it is israel. >> charlie: obviously you can now understand that the israelis have some reason to worry about their security interest. you know what gaza, what
resulted in gaza. how does that arab world and the rest of the world guarantee in some way or allay their security concerns. >> that's the reason people are seeking peace. the peace initiative is a means of waging peace rather than waging war. the arab war has crossed the rubicon until the peace initiative there was that contention and in some cases that the arabs did not accept israel as a neighbor and would like to see the people of israel ejected. >> charlie: and those whether it's the gaza strip or ighboring countries are not a place or do not do everything they can to make sure that
they're not attacks against israel. >> one of the ironies of the present situation in gaza, for example, is that hamas which is considered by israel as a terrorist orgazation, is guarding israel from rocket launches by offshoot extremist groups in gaza. so what does that tell you? it tells you that hamas considers that that action of throwing rockets to isrl is wrong. it's again their intere and they have entered into cease-fire agreements in direct and otherwise with israel that they have held sips the last -- >> charlie: between fatah and hamas did not seem to reach the level of fruition we hoped. >> we all hoped that that fruition will come about because i think there are imperatives on the palestinians to come together. it is totally unacceptable that
there should be a gernment in dpaw -- gaza and a government n the west bank. the palestinians can't afford that and that's agreement they signed. >> charlie: could your government if itwants psuade those in hamas and gaza to release the singular israeli soldier they hold? >> your government has influence too and could your gernment persuade israel to release the 10,000 palestinian prisoners in israel. it's not that kind of situation. you got 10,000 people under incarceration in israel, all of them palestinians, some are children, some are women, some are old people. >> charlie: some are charged with murder. >> those charged with murde
will get their just deserve and some are hold without prior and even without accusation. you have on the other side one soldier who is captured in a military oration by hamas. so which has more imperatives, more than the other? i think if your government is serious about it, they would have pressured israel to reach an agreement with hamas that hamas offered toelease -- in return for release of certain prisoners of these 10,000 held by israel. >> charlie: is there any indicati that hamas is changing. >> let me put it this way. you go back to 1993, okay. the plo then had the same language in its charter that hamas has in i charter about the removal of israel from
palestinian territory, palestinian claims on all the territory, etcetera, etcetera. etcetera. and yet because of the negotiations that took place at the time and the agreement of oslo, those clauses from the charter of the plo were removed. >> charlie: so hamasis prepared. >> i believe, i believe that if hamas is given the chance to be a partner in the peace process rather than outside the peace process, that they can be convinced d persuaded to remove those things from their charter. but that's something hypothetical that i'm telling you. >> charlie: but it would be a very positive development. >> absolutely. for everybody. >> charlie: israelis also look to theollowing. they say that -- made a lot of concessions with are president clinton and yasser arafat and
that arafat was not prepared to accept a deal that was offered today. they also look at the may and he said they offered many things that the palestinians wantedst it was not accepted. >> look when they made those offers. barak in 2000 and he lost the election two month after the camp david accords were held and 2008 when helost his position as the prime minister of israel. how can a palestinian leadership agree to anything where a government has fallen. now if netanyahu today were to make the same offers or to stat his dpoarksz with the
palestinians where the negotiations were ended, i think you could have a substanti and positive agreement between the palestinians. >> charlie: so unless netanyahu make those kinds of offers and put those kinds of proposals on the tele, then you might have negotiations and not have the statehood at the united nations. >> that's what -- has said. he said we've been trying to make these negotiations for a couple years now and we got no where. >> charlie: the arab spring. how has it changed the region. >> let me start by saying that i am not calling it the arab spring. >> charlie: why not? >> because there's too much bloodshed. if you look from across libya to even egypt, syria, yemen, bahrain, there has been too many people killed. to call that a spring-like condition i think is to be
unfair to the rest of the arab rld. >> charlie: it's a spring for the people who were looking for fresh beginning in terms of dignity, in terms of an opportunity to influence their own destiny, in terms of the capacity to express their own political views. >> all of at is correct. but i would give it time before i would call it spring. to see the benefits and fruits of the sacrifice that was made by the people inhe kingdom. now you come and tell me this is a rk in progress, i would agree with you. whether it is in egypt or in tunis or libya or yemen and hrain and even other countries. all of us have been affecd by these events that started in tunis. but it istill a work in progress we still have to wait for the
benefits. the economies have to be developed. job opportunities have to be offered. tourists have to go, start going back to visit places like the pyramids in egypt or the coast of tunis etcetera. >> charlie: by calling for the removal of mubarak, whatever the exact words that was used, were you very upset about that? >> personally, i was because i don'think the president should have done that at that time. we in the kingdom have pursued policies in therab world, some call them cautious, some call them very slow, etcetera. but we prefer to let the people take a stand first and tn we make our decisions. i'll give you an example. in 1952, when the egyptian revolution took place und
yasser against king farouk. he was a close friend of -- very close. the only country they -- officially was egypt at the invitation. there was this coup te -- he met withim and met with these people and tell them the following. that we deal with the people of egypt not to the leaders. our main thrust is to have good relations with the people of egypt. i will continue to have good relations with the exkg folk but that does not mean that i object to the leadership that the people of egypt accepted. and when king -- said that to the revolutionary council, one of the offices who was there who was totally unknown to king faisal at the time, stood up and
said your highness, he was at the time a foreign minister, this is the first time we heard words like that from any visitors of egypt. he cept his ambassador to cairo. this is that officer who spoke for this group and he told him. they have a personal friendship between the two. anyway, this is the same message that our foreign ministers took to the leadership of both egypt and tunis when he visited them that we accept what egyptian people and the if tunisian ople -- >> charlie: that's not the message to the people of bahrain. >> bahrain is a country in alliance and agreement with saudi arabia as a member of the bcc in which the legitimate government in bahrain called for
help from its gcc partners to protect installations in bahrain. the troops and subsequent troops that went there, they went to protect the sea port, the airport, the refinery and the business district. they had absolutely no involvement in any of the demonstrations or the calling of demonstrations by the bahrain forces. if you look at pictures of bahrain today, google earth for example you will see that these forces are encamped around these areas i told you. >> charlie: if i said a popular convention of wisdom was the saudis went there to mcsure there was no revolution in bahrain to overthrow the monarchy the same way there was a revolution in tunisian and in egypt and in libya, you would
say. >> i would say saudi arabia before, during and after called for negotiations -- >> charlie: what's the status of those negotiations in a country that's a majority shi'a and sunni are. >> sunni minority of the people. king of bahrain started a commission to investigation the events that happened back in february and march in bahrain. that investigation is ongoing. he has called for negotiations and they've held several sessions of negotiations in bahrain with all of the opposing parties. one of those opposing parties we decided not to negotiate. and have decided to keep out side. and yet king hamid and his negotiators continue to say that
they're hong that they will come back and negotiate. there are going to be elections i think in october to fill the vague - vacant seats when they resigned from the parliament in bahrain. and it's an ongoing story there. and my point on bahrain is that negotiation is what is required. not bloodshed. and definitely not draconian measures as has happened. even bahrain has admitted at some quelling of the disturbances went beyond what was needed for keeping the peace. >> charlie: did the obama handling of these events across the board cause you to the saudi government to think, to admire them moral? >> i can't speak for the saudi government. >> charlie: how about you.
>> me personally, i think the oba administration probably like all administrations anywhere in the world will address their local interests and internal interests in order not to be if you like blamed for anything that might happen somewhere and they did not take a position on it. so i think they were more concerned about what congress wod say, about what happened in bahrain than basically what was handi in bahrain was. from that context as an individual, i wish that they would be less, less quickbout making statements and allowing things to appear to what they really are. rather than trying to influence them from the very beginning. >> charlie: it's a pleasure to have you here. >> thank you again. and i'm glad you are in good